Appeals question

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Why would an appeal not be a play?

OK, let's say an appeal is "a play".

PLAY: R1 & R2 at 1st and 2nd. Batter hits a base clearing triple. The defense believes that R1 missed 2nd and that R2 missed 3rd. They throw the ball to 2nd, tag the bag, and claim that R1 missed 2nd. Then, they throw the ball to 3rd and claim that R2 missed 3rd.

Should the umpire disallow the second appeal (at 3rd) because there was an intervening play - one of the criteria for disallowing an appeal? It would seem that would be the case if an appeal was considered "a play".

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

OK, let's say an appeal is "a play".

PLAY: R1 & R2 at 1st and 2nd. Batter hits a base clearing triple. The defense believes that R1 missed 2nd and that R2 missed 3rd. They throw the ball to 2nd, tag the bag, and claim that R1 missed 2nd. Then, they throw the ball to 3rd and claim that R2 missed 3rd.

Should the umpire disallow the second appeal (at 3rd) because there was an intervening play - one of the criteria for disallowing an appeal? It would seem that would be the case if an appeal was considered "a play".

OK, I see your point now. And I do see the apparent inconsistency with the word play.

[Publius]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

Are you sure?

Quite.

[RPatrino]

Originally Posted by Publius

Quite.

Quite what? You can make an appeal to an unoccupied base while still in contact with the rubber? Please clarify.

[Dave Reed]

If it will make Bob feel better, consider the NCAA rule 8-6b(10): It is not a balk for a pitcher, while in contact with the rubber (does not step back), to throw to an unoccupied base for the purpose of making an appeal play.

For OBR, consider 8.05 Comment: Umpires should bear in mind that the purpose of the balk rule is to prevent the pitcher from deliberately deceiving the base runner. If there is doubt in the umpire’s mind, the “intent” of the pitcher should govern.

I think that nearly always all the players recognize an appeal which is being made from the mound.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

OK, let's say an appeal is "a play".

PLAY: R1 & R2 at 1st and 2nd. Batter hits a base clearing triple. The defense believes that R1 missed 2nd and that R2 missed 3rd. They throw the ball to 2nd, tag the bag, and claim that R1 missed 2nd. Then, they throw the ball to 3rd and claim that R2 missed 3rd.

Should the umpire disallow the second appeal (at 3rd) because there was an intervening play - one of the criteria for disallowing an appeal? It would seem that would be the case if an appeal was considered "a play".

An appeal is a play.

It's "not considered" ONLY for the purpose of making multiple appeals. It's really that simple.

[RPatrino]

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

If it will make Bob feel better, consider the NCAA rule 8-6b(10): It is not a balk for a pitcher, while in contact with the rubber (does not step back), to throw to an unoccupied base for the purpose of making an appeal play.

For OBR, consider 8.05 Comment: Umpires should bear in mind that the purpose of the balk rule is to prevent the pitcher from deliberately deceiving the base runner. If there is doubt in the umpire’s mind, the “intent” of the pitcher should govern.

I think that nearly always all the players recognize an appeal which is being made from the mound.

I will grant that technically, it is NOT a balk if the pitcher throws to a base for the purpose of making an appeal play. However, if the pitcher does not step directly to the base, or otherwise balks, a balk is considered a play and the appeal will be nullified.

So, to be safe, I recommend that a pitcher step back off the rubber prior to making a throw to a base for an appeal.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Dave Reed

If it will make Bob feel better, consider the NCAA rule 8-6b(10): It is not a balk for a pitcher, while in contact with the rubber (does not step back), to throw to an unoccupied base for the purpose of making an appeal play.

For OBR, consider 8.05 Comment: Umpires should bear in mind that the purpose of the balk rule is to prevent the pitcher from deliberately deceiving the base runner. If there is doubt in the umpire’s mind, the “intent” of the pitcher should govern.

I think that nearly always all the players recognize an appeal which is being made from the mound.

Forget the deceit part. It's a stupid statement anyhow because the pitcher deceives the runner on purpose to get him leaning. It just has to be done without breaking the balk rules.

MLBUM: It is NOT a balk for the pitcher, while in contact with the rubber, to throw to an unoccupied base IF it is for the purpose of making an appeal play. (Note that the pitcher does not have to step back off the rubber to make an appeal play.) The emphasis is in the book.

[johnnyg08]

Why is it so tough for people to simply let go of the fact that you can throw to an unoccupied base for the purpose of making a play or making an appeal?

It baffles me. Open the rule book. Is it lying?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

Open the rule book. Is it lying?

Well, not this time.

[Publius]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

I will grant that technically, it is NOT a balk if the pitcher throws to a base for the purpose of making an appeal play. However, if the pitcher does not step directly to the base, or otherwise balks, a balk is considered a play and the appeal will be nullified.

So, to be safe, I recommend that a pitcher step back off the rubber prior to making a throw to a base for an appeal.

Most of the balks I call during appeals are committed when the pitcher tries to step off prior to throwing to the base. They're always making movements committing them to pitch before they throw over. If they'd just throw to the base when an infielder has the ball instead of going through all the gyrations they do with calling time, taking the rubber, and stepping off they'd be way better off.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Publius

Most of the balks I call during appeals are committed when the pitcher tries to step off prior to throwing to the base. They're always making movements committing them to pitch before they throw over. If they'd just throw to the base when an infielder has the ball instead of going through all the gyrations they do with calling time, taking the rubber, and stepping off they'd be way better off.

I agree with your last sentence but I've never seen a pitcher commit to home before stepping off when he knows he's going to throw to a base for an appeal.